Costco Incentive, RV Ordinance Offer a Study in Contrast of How The Elk Grove City Council Functions

At the Wednesday, April 14, 2017, Elk Grove City Council meeting there were two agenda items that offered a classic study in contrast...

At the Wednesday, April 14, 2017, Elk Grove City Council meeting there were two agenda items that offered a classic study in contrasts. Those items, both controversial, were the sales tax kickback for Pappas Investments' Costco project and the recreational vehicle ordinance discussion.

The sales tax kickback hearing was fairly straight forward. Pappas Investments, a major developer in Elk Grove and financial contributor to four of the five current Elk Grove City Council members sought, and was awarded, a sales tax kickback that could be worth up to $14 million.

Even though there was widespread criticism of Elk Grove's latest case of corporate welfare, the City Council would not hear any of that. The scheme is good for the people of Elk Grove, they rationalized notwithstanding the fuzzy financial numbers supplied by Pappas Investments, and that was that.

Not surprisingly, Mayor Steve Ly and Vice Mayor Pat Hume seemed especially peeved and even offended when it was cleverly suggested by Elk Grove resident Amar Shergill they return any donations they received from Pappas Investments should they pass the sales tax kickback. How dare their integrity be questioned.

Touchy, Touchy!  

During deliberations, Hume denigrated Shergill's comments, and worse, Ly enlisted City Attorney Jonathan Hobbs, wrapped himself in the flag and then cowardly hid behind a Citizen's United defense that taking the Pappas cash is a matter of free speech.

Give me cash or give me death!

As we know, the sales kickback was approved by a 4-0 vote, and it was business as usual - socialized risk for Elk Grove taxpayers and privatized profits for Pappas Investments. 

With regards to the possible changes to the residential recreational vehicle storage ordinance, the City Council was more receptive to comments from the public. Could it be the number of emails they received from constituents voicing displeasure with possible changes that influenced them against any loosening of the ordinance?


The actual reason, and of course the Council Members will swear on their favorite contributors grave this is not the case, is there were no moneyed interests in play. You can take it to the bank had one of their contributors with the sway of someone like Pappas Investments had some economic interests in the matter, they would have taken their marching orders from their contributors.

Put another way, when there is something of interest in the community that does not interfere with the needs and wants of their contributors, they might listen and act in the interests of constituents, not their benefactors. 

The next time you bring this up with a Council Member who says this is not the case, ask them of specific instances where they have voted against an item brought forward or supported by one of their major contributors. You are guaranteed to get a dear-in-the-headlights response.

And one last word of advice to the operators of RV storage facilities in and around Elk Grove - you better get your checkbooks out and cough up some cash if you want to ensure the Elk Grove City Council does not re-explore residential RV storage and potentially kill your business. 


Politics & Government 6680842038599604357

Post a Comment

No vulgarity in your comments. If you use it, it will be deleted.


Follow Us

Most popular